Annex this: Canada chases energy superpowerdom
Canada hopes to shake off its dependence on the United States by becoming an energy 'superpower.'
But the new government's pursuit of dominance through both fossil fuels and clean power could ultimately undermine its climate goals.
Newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney built his campaign around opposition to U.S. President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly threatened to annex Canada. He also entered office with a fair amount of climate cred: the former central banker once served as the United Nations' special envoy on climate action and finance and has long promoted a clean energy transition.
But his Liberal government is now pledging to battle a brewing trade war with the U.S. by boosting exports of oil and natural gas, burning more fossil fuels domestically, and easing barriers to east-west flows of fuel and electricity.
That message was driven home on Tuesday, when King Charles III opened the Canadian Parliament with a speech that left climate activists disillusioned, writes Sara Schonhardt. Charles' address, which was written by members of Carney's government, emphasized both clean and 'conventional' energy and heralded a new effort to speed up permitting for major projects.
Caroline Brouillette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, said Charles missed an opportunity to clarify Canada's energy future.
'Fighting climate change and becoming a renewables superpower, or doubling down on volatile fossil fuels?' Brouillette told Sara. 'We can't do both.'
Next-door neighbors
The United States' and Canada's energy fortunes are entwined. Canada is the largest source of U.S. energy imports, and the U.S. is by far Canada's largest buyer. With Trump's threat of increasingly severe tariffs, Canada wants to build out its energy infrastructure to enable it to more easily export to other countries.
To be competitive, Canada's oil has to be 'produced responsibly,' the country's new energy minister, Tim Hodgson, said during a speech last week. He has proposed building carbon capture systems for the nation's oil sands. But climate activists say now is not the time to invest even more in carbon-polluting infrastructure.
Canada is already lagging in meeting its climate target for 2030. The country set a new goal for 2035, but analysts say the target is too weak to comply with the Paris Agreement.
Charles' speech still drew a major distinction between the Canadian government and the United States by mentioning the need to combat climate change. Trump has called climate change a hoax and moved to dismantle major parts of the U.S. government tasked with tackling it.
The king's address — the first time the Crown has opened Parliament in decades — left the door open to future climate actions, emphasizing the creation of more national parks, marine protected areas and other conservation initiatives.
It's Wednesday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Arianna Skibell. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to askibell@eenews.net.
Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Catherine Morehouse breaks down Trump's four executive orders aimed at boosting America's nuclear industry.
Power Centers
What exactly is Trump's energy council doing?It has been more than three since months since Trump launched a council to promote U.S. energy supremacy, write Carlos Anchondo and Ian M. Stevenson.
While some Trump supporters credit the group with a variety of achievements — from lowering gasoline prices to expanding critical mineral mining — how it operates, when it convenes and even who its members are remain a mystery.
Montana lawmakers blunt group's historic court winClimate activists scored a pair of landmark legal victories in Montana over the past two years, giving momentum to similar youth-led efforts across the globe, writes Lesley Clark.
Now state lawmakers have responded by targeting the underlying law that helped propel the young activists to a courtroom win after they argued their constitutional right to a healthy environment had been violated.
BLM official escorted out after dissentingA senior leader at the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management was escorted out its headquarters Tuesday after POLITICO reported that he opposed staffing directions from a former 'Department of Government Efficiency' appointee, writes Ben Lefebvre.
The removal of Mike Nedd, BLM's deputy director for administration and programs, is the latest personnel upheaval at the bureau that oversees oil, natural gas and mineral production on federal land and is considered key for the Trump administration's goal of increasing fossil fuel production.
In Other News
Legal blow: A German court threw out a Peruvian farmer's climate lawsuit against one of the country's energy giants.
Heat risk alert: Global temperatures could break heat records in the next five years.
Subscriber Zone
A showcase of some of our best subscriber content.
Los Angeles residents whose homes were destroyed by wildfires in January have received hundreds of millions of dollars in additional aid after a little-noticed federal policy shift in 2023.
The EU is 'well on track' to reach its 2030 goal to cut 55 percent of planet-warming emissions, according to new findings released Wednesday.
One of the largest casualties of Republicans' megabill may be the build-out of a U.S. 'green' hydrogen industry — killing the industry before it gets started.
That's it for today, folks! Thanks for reading.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Analysts assess the potential impact of Trump's surprise 50% steel tariffs
-- U.S. President Donald Trump unexpectedly announced on Friday that steel and aluminum tariffs will double to 50%. The move, set to come into effect on June 4, was unveiled during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It was later confirmed on TruthSocial and comes amid broader debates around U.S. industrial policy and foreign investment. Analysts are now evaluating the implications of this surprise decision, with most agreeing that the immediate domestic effects may be less severe than the broader geopolitical risks. JPMorgan's Tatsuya Maruyama said the direct impact on major Japanese steelmakers such as Nippon Steel Corp (TYO:5401), JFE Holdings, Inc. (TYO:5411), and Kobe Steel, Ltd. (TYO:5406) is expected to be limited, given that 'the U.S. accounts for about 4% of Japan's steel exports.' Maruyama pointed out in a Monday note that Nippon Steel and JFE export only about 1% of their total shipments to the U.S., while Kobe Steel exports about 3%. Still, he warned that 'rising global protectionism' is a growing concern, noting that a wave of anti-dumping measures and safeguards in regions like South Korea, the EU, and India could further strain global trade dynamics. 'If such countermeasures gain momentum, Japanese steel products may also be targeted and the export environment may worsen,' Maruyama continued. Meanwhile, analysts at BMO Capital Markets believe the sudden tariff hike could jolt domestic markets. 'The doubling of import tariffs, if maintained, is likely to create a panic in the market and trigger a restocking cycle that in our view has the potential to push prices >$1,000/st in the near-term,' the analysts said. However, they believe the spike would be temporary given macro uncertainty and seasonal demand trends. The broker upgraded Nucor (NYSE:NUE) to Outperform but downgraded Algoma Central (TSX:ALC), which it called 'a relative tariff loser.' The aluminum market may be more exposed, according to BMO. The U.S. covers only about 20% of its own aluminum consumption domestically, making it more vulnerable to supply disruptions. 'If tariffs do double, this is expected to put material upside pressure on the Midwest premium (MWP),' BMO wrote, estimating it could reach '$0.75/lb-plus' in theory, although higher aluminum cost will likely weigh on demand and thus offset some upside pressure. That said, the brokerage sees Century Aluminum (NASDAQ:CENX) as well positioned to benefit from a rise in the Midwest premium, while Alcoa (NYSE:AA) could see a negative impact of $1–2 per share, or 4–7%, due to its reliance on Canadian production. Still, BMO expects Alcoa may redirect some of its Canadian output to the EU market. Related articles Analysts assess the potential impact of Trump's surprise 50% steel tariffs Street Calls of the Week VIDEO: How to analyze a stock like a pro with the CEO of HF Foods
Hamilton Spectator
22 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Ontario PCs to limit debate on controversial Bill 5, among other legislation
TORONTO - Ontario Premier Doug Ford's government is moving to shut down debate on its most controversial piece of legislation this session, one of a plethora of bills getting the fast-track treatment before the legislature rises for a summer break. A mining law known as Bill 5 that would give the government power to suspend provincial and municipal laws for chosen projects in areas deemed to have economic importance – and remove some endangered species protections – has sparked a lot of opposition. A legislative committee heard from First Nations leaders and environmental groups, as well as mining groups, over two days and as the committee was considering amendments last week the NDP and Liberals used procedural tools to grind the process to a halt, in protest. Government house leader Steve Clark is now stepping in to limit further committee time and require the bill to go back to the house for third reading, with just one hour of debate, and a final vote that same day. While Bill 5 got two days of committee hearings, the six other pieces of legislation the government is speeding up have had no hearings, and will have as little as half an hour of third-reading debate, with just nine minutes each allotted to the two recognized opposition parties. The opposition parties say pushing bills through without much public consultation or debate is undemocratic. The NDP's Opposition house leader, John Vanthof, spoke in a debate last week over the government limiting debate and bypassing committee for four bills – including the budget bill – in what's called a time allocation motion. 'What's happening now with the time allocation, specifically on four bills, is removing the right of the people to speak, and in many ways, the opposition to speak,' Vanthof said. 'You actually don't need a parliament. We're actually almost going back to where you have, like, a king. That's truly scary. I'm not opposed to the monarchy as a figurehead, but we came very far in our democracies to actually have parliaments. What the government is doing is basically making the premier the king.' Vanthof stressed the seriousness of the matter, though he had the opposition benches laughing while he was reading out quotes from government house leader Steve Clark, upset about time allocation motions when he was in opposition. 'My party loves to hear from people,' Clark said in the waning days of the former Liberal government. 'If this government doesn't want to listen to people, I'll give them a guarantee. I'll give them, actually, the people's guarantee, because we will listen to them, and we will ensure that those Ontarians are being listened to.' Clark, who during that 2017 debate called such motions 'anti-democratic,' said last week that the younger Steve Clark was 'maybe more brash and abrupt,' defending the current moves. 'The government has decided that these four bills are very important for us,' he said. 'There needs to be certainty from the government's government decides that they're going to prioritize certain things, the government is going to move forward with those legislations. That's my message.' However much the former Liberal government shut down debate, the Progressive Conservative government is a worse offender, Vanthof said. 'Two time allocation votes in a day was probably the previous record for the travesty to democracy, probably the previous record, and that was held by the Liberals,' he said. 'But this government is so efficient, including destroying the democratic process, that they put four bills, including a budget, in one time allocation motion.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 2, 2025.
Hamilton Spectator
22 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
‘Mission impossible': Why the Bank of Canada faces ‘risky' June rate decision
OTTAWA - Few would confuse Hollywood action star Tom Cruise with Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem. But while Cruise rides a plane in tailspin to his latest box office smash, some economists say Macklem finds himself in his own high-stakes circumstances with the central bank's interest rate decision on Wednesday. Macklem's mission is to chart a path for interest rates that keeps Canada's economy afloat at a precarious moment without straying from its inflation-taming mandate. 'It really is mission impossible,' said Andrew DiCapua, principal economist at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce. The latest data show price pressures could be building up again in Canada at the same time some economists warn of a tariff-induced slowdown on the horizon, pulling monetary policy in opposite directions. 'The bank really is in a difficult position here, but they really should be resuming rate cuts to get their interest rates lower to somewhere around two per cent, again, to cushion the Canadian economy for what's to come,' DiCapua argued. The Bank of Canada's policy rate stands at 2.75 per cent following a pause at the central bank's last decision in April, snapping a streak of seven consecutive cuts. Most economists expect the central bank will hold rates again on Wednesday. In April, Macklem said the Bank of Canada would pause issuing any formal forecasts and be less forward-looking than usual until it gained more certainty on how the economy would react to ever-shifting tariff threats. President Donald Trump threw a new wrench into the gears of global trade late Friday when he announced plans to double existing tariffs on steel and aluminum entering the United States to 50 per cent starting Wednesday. After Statistics Canada reported a surprisingly strong 2.2 per cent annualized rise in real gross domestic product for the first quarter on Friday, money markets were betting overwhelmingly in favour of another rate hold this week. BMO last week firmed up its call for another hold in response to the latest economic data, now projecting a cut to instead come in July. 'The key point here is that the GDP figures are sending no obvious distress signals so far in 2025,' BMO chief economist Doug Porter said in a note to clients. But the question for some economists isn't what the economy has done — it's what comes next. The Bank of Canada's own surveys of businesses published in early April showed sentiment was 'sharply' lower amid the tariff uncertainty, with many firms putting investment and hiring plans on hold. StatCan said the main reason Canada's economy was growing in the first quarter was because many businesses were trying to rush ahead of the tariffs, ramping up exports and stockpiling inventories. Macklem said at the G7 Finance Ministers' Summit in Kananaskis, Alta., last month that the Bank of Canada was expecting a run-up in economic activity in the first quarter, but that the months that follow 'will be quite a bit weaker.' 'They're really waiting for a shoe to drop, so to speak,' said DiCapua. There were early signs of economic pain in the April jobs figures released last month, with the trade-sensitive manufacturing sector contracting by roughly 31,000 positions and the unemployment rate rising two ticks to 6.9 per cent. A slowing economy usually takes the steam out of inflation as Canadians swap spending for saving, but April inflation data showed underlying price pressures were instead heating up. Cutting interest rates can encourage businesses and consumers to spend — mitigating an economic hit — but also risks fuelling inflationary pressures. 'Outside of the current situation that we're in, I would say that the Bank of Canada should be holding interest rates,' DiCapua said. 'But the data that we are seeing come in, especially through the labour market ... is going to move the Canadian economy into a very weak position that should keep prices at bay. So it's kind of a risky balance here.' Stephen Brown, deputy chief North America economist at Capital Economics, said he expects the central bank will deliver three more quarter-point cuts at every other decision to bring the policy rate down to two per cent before the end of the year. 'Our view at Capital Economics is that it's worth cutting again in June as insurance against those downside risks and try and protect the economy a bit,' he said. There are also 'psychological' reasons for a June cut, Brown argued. Should the Bank of Canada keep rates elevated, businesses and consumers may hold back even more on their spending decisions, which can become a self-fulfilling prophecy that weakens the economy. 'If the bank doesn't cut here, because they're still very concerned about inflation, that's telling businesses and consumers that the bank doesn't necessarily have their back,' Brown said. CIBC chief economist Avery Shenfeld is among those calling for a rate hold this week. He said he sees the case for an interest rate cut too, but doesn't think the Bank of Canada's June decision is its final reckoning. 'No one interest rate decision in isolation would ever be a fatal error one way or the other, but I think the clock will start to tick louder on getting some interest rate relief if the economy remains soft,' Shenfeld said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 2, 2025.
